Well, in our first 5th Ed game:
I got knocked down by a max damage Longbow shot (9 damage = my 9HP); I made my death save, and fortunately was on a roof, so I didn't get mauled by a couple of war dogs below.

my son got critical'd in his first round, and failed his three death saves afterward. 1st Character death.

Chasing after the slavers that took our townspeople, I managed to save a few from the slave wagon, before again being brought to 0HP. I was saved from death by the people I saved. (we rolled for it, and I went 5 rolls before finally dying)

In the 2nd game:
The 3rd-level Barbarian with 41HP, got put down in the big fight. The Druid patched him up with Medicine two successful death saves later, so he's at 1HP, when we wrapped up last night's game. Pretty much everyone got hurt a bit, but he got the lion's share.

I'd say it's harder to "insta-kill" PC's, but death is still very real. More to the point, it makes "returning villains" more likely (especially if a GM fudges the death saves)

Quote from: Ladybird;815972I dunno, that seems a bit gamey, and like it's taking advantage of the fight being under a turn structure rather than being a chaotic melee.

Post-fight, sure; but during the fight, things should be too messy.

(And then there's question "how much medical work can someone full of adrenaline really do in six seconds, to a patient so badly wounded they'll die in 18 seconds". In games with longer combat rounds, the medic would have more time to do things, but the opponents would have more time to "distract" them.)

In general, I agree.  However, as a game the turn structure works just fine.  Or at least, I have yet to see an alternative that works better at the table.  

It helps me to justify things to imagine that the actual battle occurring is not specifically what happens at the table.  Rather, table play is stylized symbolism of the actual battle.  For instance, I do not think of turns as six seconds, but rather, turns as whatever amount of time necessary for the action with six seconds as a mere generic recommendation.  

Kind of hokey, but overall the game structure works damn well at my table.

Quote from: Omega;815978Lingering Injuries table page 272 in the DMG.
When takes a critical hit, or When drops to 0 hp but does not die, or When fails a death save by 5.

I am using it when the PC is at zero and gets hit again as that is an automatic critical and probably would have a lasting effect even if its just a scar.

Next page has system shock! Which is more lethal at lower levels than high... Kind of like the AD&D version, just not as forgiving.

I'll point that out to our GM... though I kinda doubt he'll make use of it. Players were joshing him last night about being 'too nice' but I think they were at least partially serious, not wanting him to pull punches as much as he seemed to be.
My PC is a Wild Magic Sorcerer and he's yet to have me roll on the Surge table.

Quote from: Simlasa;816001I'll point that out to our GM... though I kinda doubt he'll make use of it. Players were joshing him last night about being 'too nice' but I think they were at least partially serious, not wanting him to pull punches as much as he seemed to be.
My PC is a Wild Magic Sorcerer and he's yet to have me roll on the Surge table.

I would be really bummed.

That's part of the FUN.

Quote from: Panjumanju;815955

Quote from: Sommerjon;815856Are you supposed to be killing X number of characters per a X number of sessions?

No, I'm just afraid they might start thinking themselves immortal. I want players to think of running away if they're in over their heads. It's a sandbox, and if this keeps going I expect they'll waltz in somewhere over their heads assuming they couldn't possibly die, and as a result they all do.

If a character dies now and again it keeps the other characters in check with their mortality.

//Panjumanju

Hmmm.  You say no, but then follow it up with a yes.

Quote from: Panjumanju;815955No, I'm just afraid they might start thinking themselves immortal. I want players to think of running away if they're in over their heads. It's a sandbox, and if this keeps going I expect they'll waltz in somewhere over their heads assuming they couldn't possibly die, and as a result they all do.

If a character dies now and again it keeps the other characters in check with their mortality.

//Panjumanju

Next time they go looking for an encounter, have them run into some impossibly huge monster that would obviously murder them all instantly. Then make it so that they haven't been spotted yet, which gives them a chance to back away.

How do you guys feel about getting injuries and such not just when you hit 0, but when you take a lot of damage? For instance, in my game last night, my little brother's character fell down a steep drop and took 3d6; he got reduced to 1 hit point on the spot. But after the others found him they restored him back to near full health and that was that.

Should there be any lasting scar from that? Which also reminds me: how does healing work in D&D? Suppose something claws up your face. Does healing it simply make it as if it never happened? Or does it scar over, with the marks left over as if they had healed naturally?

Hit points are a necessary abstraction that has been defined differently over the years and systems. As for 5e...

Hit Points
Hit points represent a combination of physical and mental durability, the will to live, and luck. Creatures with more hit points are more difficult to kill. Those with fewer hit points are more fragile. [...]
(D&D 5e Basic .pdf, August 2014. p. 74.)

As for adding scars, physical or emotional or whatever, that is completely up to GM prerogative and campaign setting relevance. DMG does offer Sanity, Honor, Wounds, etc. and they are all just recommendations on how to. You are free to scribble up your own systems and tables.

As to my preference? Depends on the game offered by GM & their take on campaign setting. Samurai game with dishonorable prat fall, plus good. Pirate game with fetching scar #2 on the wounds chart, double plus good.

Quote from: Sommerjon;816006Hmmm.  You say no, but then follow it up with a yes.

The goal is not to kill characters - the goal is to make players remember they're characters are mortal and *could* die.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;816036How do you guys feel about getting injuries and such not just when you hit 0, but when you take a lot of damage?

That's already in the game. The Injury table applies in several circumstances, and the Shock table applies whenever you take as much as half HP damage from a single instance. I think the two of them together are already what you're looking for.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;816036Should there be any lasting scar from that? Which also reminds me: how does healing work in D&D? Suppose something claws up your face. Does healing it simply make it as if it never happened? Or does it scar over, with the marks left over as if they had healed naturally?

I have always played DnD as magical healing leaves no scars, natural healing leaves scars.  Never had it do anything but cosmetic effects other than the extreme case where someone puts their hand in a Sphere of Annihilation or whatever.

Quote from: Panjumanju;816082The goal is not to kill characters - the goal is to make players remember they're characters are mortal and *could* die.



That's already in the game. The Injury table applies in several circumstances, and the Shock table applies whenever you take as much as half HP damage from a single instance. I think the two of them together are already what you're looking for.

//Panjumanju

Okay. Do spells like Cure Wounds heal things like broken legs or injuries? Or is it just HP?

Basically I am wondering since if I want to start throwing in injuries like that into the game the players are going to try to fix it of course. So I have to know what would work.

One reading of Cure spells and potions is that it essentially removes exhaustion and clears the mind. But other readings seem to indicate that it heals and mends. There is mention of removing a scar with a spell I believe. How much removed? Who knows.

It depends on how you read damage at your table? stamina or meat? Both?

Build off from the base assumption and you'll have an idea what cures and such will and wont cover.

Quote from: Panjumanju;816082

Quote from: Panjumanju;815955

Quote from: Panjumanju;815821I'm running a 5th edition game right now. We're 5 sessions in (of about 4 to 5 hours each) and there has been no character death.

In every other D&D game I've run continuously at least one character has died before this point, but it just isn't happening. The players keep using best tactics, and whenever a character actually does drop to 0 the damage hasn't been sufficient to kill them outright, and they end up making their saves.

Net win? So far, I think so. I'll kill one of them eventually - but, damn, 5e characters get a tonne of Hit Points.

No, I'm just afraid they might start thinking themselves immortal. I want players to think of running away if they're in over their heads. It's a sandbox, and if this keeps going I expect they'll waltz in somewhere over their heads assuming they couldn't possibly die, and as a result they all do.

If a character dies now and again it keeps the other characters in check with their mortality.

The goal is not to kill characters - the goal is to make players remember they're characters are mortal and *could* die.

Are these players brand new to gaming?
If not and these are your established gaming group.  I would hazard a good guess they already realize their characters are not immortal.

Unfortunately all I'm hearing is "Friggin characters ain't dieing, WTF? Sumbitches.  I kill one of these mofos yet. Mark my words!"

Quote from: Sommerjon;816152Unfortunately all I'm hearing is "Friggin characters ain't dieing, WTF? Sumbitches.  I kill one of these mofos yet. Mark my words!"

That is because it is all you are willing to hear, sommerjon. It is not a problem with what Panjumanju is saying, it is entirely a problem with it not matching what the voices in your head are saying. You think you'd get tired of this schtick by now.

Quote from: jeff37923;816154That is because it is all you are willing to hear, sommerjon. It is not a problem with what Panjumanju is saying, it is entirely a problem with it not matching what the voices in your head are saying. You think you'd get tired of this schtick by now.

Sorry jeffy, we get this from panju
"In every other D&D game I've run continuously at least one character has died before this point, but it just isn't happening"

"I'll kill one of them eventually"

"If a character dies now and again it keeps the other characters in check with their mortality"

But somehow he wants us to believe
"The goal is not to kill characters"?

Nah, I don't think so.

I gamed with Dms that don't feel they did their job unless one or more PCs die.  The games end being meh more often than not.

Quote from: Sommerjon;816152Are these players brand new to gaming?

Two of them have never roleplayed before in their lives. Two of them are moderately experienced, and one is very experienced, specifically in 3rd edition Dungeons & Dragons.

Quote from: Sommerjon;816156Sorry jeffy, we get this from panju
"In every other D&D game I've run continuously at least one character has died before this point, but it just isn't happening"

"I'll kill one of them eventually"

"If a character dies now and again it keeps the other characters in check with their mortality"

But somehow he wants us to believe
"The goal is not to kill characters"?

Nah, I don't think so.

I was being flippant with those remarks, and I clarified my intentions well since. And you you think that I'm being somehow dishonest when I say the goal is not to kill characters?

To further clarify: The game lacks verisimilitude when there is no mortal threat. I don't particularly want to run an everyone-is-special-fun-time game, but I've noticed the slide in that direction by virtue of the 5th edition rules. Some posters have smartly pointed out that the Death Save mechanic can subsume the tense element of mortal risk without character death, but I worry that the players, unprepared, may march themselves into a TPK. My concern is avoiding that outcome with impartiality.

It *would have been lovely* if a character had died by this point, because then this probably wouldn't be an issue. I'm not influencing the rules or otherwise pushing characters to their death.

So, yes - I want you to somehow believe that my goal is not to kill characters.

//Panjumanju